Fenland Infrastructure Delivery Plan February 2016

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Fenland Infrastructure Delivery Plan February 2016 Fenland Infrastructure Delivery Plan February 2016 Fenland Infrastructure Delivery Plan (IDP) February 2016 1 Contents Section Page 1. Introduction 3 2. What is meant by Infrastructure? 6 3. Evidence Background 8 4. Infrastructure Requirements and Constraints 9 Highways and Transport 10 Road Network 10 Rail Based Transport 12 Cycle and Walking Improvements 13 Car Parking 13 Public Transport and Buses 13 Waterways 13 Market Town Transport Strategies 13 Utilities Infrastructure 15 Water Supply 15 Waste Water 16 Electricity 18 Gas 18 Broadband 18 Flood Risk Management Provision 19 Social and Community Infrastructure 21 Health and Elderly Care Provision 21 Education Provision 21 Community Facilities 25 Culture and Heritage Attractions 25 Emergency Services 26 Open Space and Green Infrastructure 27 5. Potential Funding and Delivery Options 28 6. Monitoring 33 7. Report Summary and Recommendations 33 8. Infrastructure Delivery Schedule 34 2 1 Introduction 1.1 The purpose of the Fenland Infrastructure Delivery Plan (IDP) is to outline the key infrastructure requirements needed or desired to support growth in Fenland up to 2031. The IDP will help to coordinate infrastructure provision and ensure that funding and delivery timescales are closely aligned to those in the Local Plan. It is a living document which will be updated regularly to incorporate changes in project progress or the availability of funding. 1.2 This IDP supersedes the Fenland IDP adopted in February 2013. The previous document mainly set out the high level strategic infrastructure required to support the adoption of the Local Plan. With an adopted plan (May 2014) now in place this updated IDP seeks to provide a basis for the delivery of the policies in that plan. Together with the Council’s adopted Developer Contributions SPD (February 2015), the IDP will be a key tool to aid delivery of infrastructure on the ground during the plan period. The IDP was considered and adopted by Full Council on 25th February 2016. 1.3 The document draws on detailed infrastructure plans and strategies from a wide range of Council services as well as external infrastructure providers to identify what, how and when infrastructure will be delivered. It uses existing published sources as well as and more up-to-date information where this is known. In addition it includes the views of parish, town and district councils as to their priorities for providing infrastructure as part of any growth which comes forward. 1.4 The aim is not to include every infrastructure project being planned in Fenland or to provide a list of all funding opportunities; the primary role of the IDP is to set out the infrastructure projects necessary to help deliver the key policies in the Fenland Local Plan 2014. It therefore does not include all specific on-site requirements – these will be agreed through Broad Concept Plans and master plans and delivered through particular development schemes. 1.5 The Infrastructure Delivery Schedule which forms part of the IDP provides a list of known projects relevant to the delivery of growth and the key policies in the Local Plan, most particularly the proposed urban extensions in and around the four market towns of Chatteris, March, Whittlesey and Wisbech. Where the known infrastructure is essential for the delivery of an urban extension this is described as ‘Critical’. Other infrastructure identified in the schedule is not essential to the delivery of the Local Plan but will assist in providing sustainable growth throughout the District. Further details are provided in Section 8. 1.6 The list in the schedule however is not finite or exhaustive and other infrastructure elements may also be required which are not currently specifically identified. Nonetheless the schedule should provide a basis to allow councillors, officers, agents, developers and the wider public to gain an initial idea of what key infrastructure will be required to help deliver the growth in the district during the plan period to 2031. Role of this document The IDP seeks to: 3 Identify infrastructure needs and costs (including where possible phasing of development, funding sources and responsibilities for delivery); Improve lines of communication between key delivery agencies and the Council, including identifying opportunities for integrated and more efficient service delivery and better use of assets; Be a ‘live’ document that will be used as a tool for guiding and coordinating the delivery of infrastructure; Not cover all site specific items of infrastructure such as new road and cycle networks within new development sites etc. Many of these will be picked up through master planning and pre-application discussions. 1.7 This IDP has two main roles. Its principal role is to support Policy LP13 of the Local Plan – “Supporting and Managing the Impact of a Growing District”. The Local Plan was adopted in May 2014 and accords with the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF)1 by identifying key items of infrastructure required to implement the objectives and policies in the Plan. 1.8 The NPPF states at paragraph 162 that: Local planning authorities should work with other authorities and providers to: assess the quality and capacity of infrastructure for transport, water supply, wastewater and its treatment, energy (including heat), telecommunications, utilities, waste, health, social care, education, flood risk and coastal change management, and its ability to meet forecast demands; and take account of the need for strategic infrastructure including nationally significant infrastructure within their areas. 1.9 The second main role is to identify and inform other corporate strategies and decisions relating to investment across Fenland. Through identifying where infrastructure is required the Council and other service providers, developers and communities are able to plan, fund and coordinate with increased certainty for the growth as set out in the Local Plan. As Fenland is in a two tier area, the Council’s role in facilitating and securing the delivery of infrastructure will vary for different projects. 1.10 This IDP also seeks to identify funding mechanisms available for infrastructure delivery to inform capital planning and help infrastructure providers apply for funds from elsewhere. Where delivery is uncertain, the Council will be able to work with its partners to implement contingency measures to secure infrastructure to meet the needs of new development. 1.11 The Council has recently adopted (February 2015) a Developer Contributions Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) which came into effect on 6th April 2015. The SPD sets out the Council’s approach for securing developer contributions from new developments that require planning permission and is available at the following link: http://www.fenland.gov.uk/ChttpHandler.ashx?id=11473&p=0 1 http://communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/nppf 4 1.12 As explained in the SPD the Council will carry out a regular review of the existing infrastructure provision in the district to determine where there are gaps to provision and where additional infrastructure is required to support new development which is provided in this updated IDP. The document therefore links closely with the SPD and sets out the current known infrastructure required to support the policies in the Local Plan. It is intended that the IDP document will be reviewed every two years with the schedule being updated annually as part of the Council’s Authorities Monitoring Report (AMR) process. Structure of the IDP 1.13 There are three main sections to this document: First of all, a narrative exploring the infrastructure needs arising from the growth set out in the Local Plan. Secondly, potential funding mechanisms, viability and monitoring arrangements. Thirdly, a schedule of infrastructure projects, including responsibilities, broad phasing and approximate costs. 5 2 What is meant by ‘Infrastructure’? 2.1 Infrastructure is a commonly used word, often linked to specific types of infrastructure such as green infrastructure, soft or hard infrastructure, strategic infrastructure and community infrastructure. Looking towards a formal definition, Section 216 of the Planning Act 20082 provides a definition of infrastructure including a list of examples which are not intended to be comprehensive. 2.2 This definition therefore includes, but is not restricted to: Transport – Road, cycle / pedestrian facilities, rail, bus, travel management, waterways, port, car parking; Energy – Electricity and gas generation and provision; Water and Drainage – Water supply, waste water, drainage, flood defences; Waste Collection & Disposal; ICT Broadband and Wireless; Open Space – Including, for example parks, children’s play areas, sports pitches and courts, country parks & accessible natural green space; Education – Nursery and pre-school; primary, secondary; further education, higher education; Health – Hospitals; health centres/GP surgeries; public health and prevention; Community Services – Libraries, community centres, youth, social services/over-50s/support, police, fire & rescue, ambulance, cemeteries and crematoria, courts, prisons, hostels, places of worship, post offices, children’s centres; special needs and disability; Culture & Leisure – Museum/galleries, theatres / venues, cinemas, sports centres, swimming pools, events, festivals and town centre programmes, markets. Items excluded from definition – 2 http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2008/29/section/216 6 2.3 Affordable
Recommended publications
  • LIVING and WORKING in the AREA CONTENTS Introduction
    LIVING AND WORKING IN THE AREA CONTENTS Introduction ............................................................. 3 The City of Cambridge ............................................. 4 Culture ...................................................................... 5 Shopping .................................................................. 6 Café Culture, Restaurants and Bars ......................... 7 Huntingdon .............................................................. 8 Residential Areas ..................................................... 10 Housing ................................................................... 12 Travel ....................................................................... 13 Settling your family into the area ........................... 14 Maps ........................................................................ 16 If you are considering relocating to the area to join CRC at either campus (or both) then you might find this brochure, which gives a snapshot into life nearby as well as some insight into housing and travel, a helpful reference. 3 THE CITY OF CAMBRIDGE Cambridge, situated in the East of England, is a beautiful, historic city best known for its academics, university colleges and the River Cam. Cambridge is a popular visitor destination attracting people from across the world. The population of Cambridge sits at approximately 125,000 with almost a fifth made up of students and a significantly high proportion of adult professionals with a higher education qualification, making it a great
    [Show full text]
  • Draft Whittlesey Neighbourhood Plan This Determination Statement
    24 August 2021 Strategic Environmental Assessment Determination Statement: Draft Whittlesey Neighbourhood Plan This determination statement has been produced by Fenland District Council (FDC) as “responsible authority”, to meet the requirements of Regulation 9 of the Environmental Assessment of Plans and Programmes Regulations 2004. This Determination Statement forms a Submission Document for the purposes of neighbourhood planning, as required by The Neighbourhood Planning (General) Regulations 2012 (as amended) (reg. 15(e)(ii)). A Screening Assessment was undertaken by FDC during the preparation of the draft Whittlesey Neighbourhood Plan. As part of this assessment, FDC consulted the statutory bodies. The SEA Screening Report follows this Determination Statement. The Screening Report examines the strategic policy and environmental context relevant to Whittlesey, and presents the findings of the screening assessment. The report identifies that the draft Whittlesey Neighbourhood Plan does not seek to increase the overall quantum of growth beyond that which has already been permitted through the planning system. Other policies generally accord with the adopted Local Plan, the potential environmental effects of which were duly assessed through the plan-making process. The Screening Report was sent to consultation bodies for comment (13 July to 23 August 2021). Responses were received from Environment Agency, Historic England and Natural England. Through its response to the draft Screening Report consultation, Historic England concurred with the Council that the preparation of a Strategic Environmental Assessment is not required. Natural England confirmed it agrees with the report’s conclusions that the Whittlesey Neighbourhood Plan would not be likely to result in a significant effect on any European Site, either alone or in combination and therefore no further assessment work is required.
    [Show full text]
  • Trumpington Meadows Design Code
    Trumpington Meadows Design Code Terence O’Rourke Ltd creating successful environments Code structure 01 Introduction 02 The code and how to use it 03 Local character analysis 04 Site wide coding 05 Character area coding 06 Delivery and review Appendices Chapter 1 Introduction 6 7 Design Principles 1.3 What is unique about Trumpington Meadows? 1 Northern gateway 3 Trumpington church 6 Primary street Entrance to development denoted Church to become a strong landmark A key feature to aid with legibility, by a small square. Line of Corsican in views from the development. the primary street has been designed A series of design principles are set out below that must be pines along Hauxton Road provide to achieve a safe environment for adhered to and that will make the scheme unique and create a strong enclosure either side of 4 Church green pedestrians and cyclists. strong sense of place. The design principles are mandatory but entrance. Intimate public space aids legibility the master plan is illustrative. on a key intersection of routes. 7 Green corridors 2 Anstey Hall place A series of green corridors, evenly Public square created to 5 Local centre and primary school spaced directly connecting the acknowledge view of Anstey Hall. This will become the community internal public spaces to the country Strong formal building line contains heart with the primary school, park and allowing green space to squares and closes off view from community facilities, local shop all flow into the development. conservation area to rear of located at this central point within a The green link denoted is aligned to Robert Sayle.
    [Show full text]
  • Baseline Report Contents
    Whittlesey DRAFT Neighbourhood Plan Baseline Report Contents Introduction...............................................................1 Relevant Planning Policy.........................................4 Basic Conditions......................................................5 People and Place......................................................6 Flooding...................................................................11 Greenspace.............................................................16 Heritage...................................................................20 Land Use.................................................................24 Roads....................................................................... 28 Walking, Cycling and Public Transport..................32 Introduction This baseline report accompanies the Whittlesey Neighbourhood Plan and provides some context for the policies set out within it. It aims to give a high-level impression of the Neighbourhood Plan Area; it is not intended to be a detailed technical report but rather an introduction to the Parish, signposting to more detailed information and supplementary documents where necessary. Whittlesey Buttercross 1 Whittlesey Location The map opposite shows the Neighbourhood Plan Boundary. Whittlesey Edinburgh Town Council applied to Fenland District Council to designate the whole of the Peterborough Newcastle Parish of Whittlesey as a ‘Neighbourhood Wisbech Area’. Planning Committee on 29 April 2015 determined the application: The Leeds March entire Parish
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report and Accounts 2017-2018
    The Wildlife Trust BCN Annual Report and Accounts 2017-2018 Some of this year’s highlights ___________________________________________________ 3 Chairman’s Introduction _______________________________________________________ 5 Strategic Report Our Five Year Plan: Better for Wildlife by 2020 _____________________________________ 6 Delivery: Wildlife Conservation __________________________________________________ 7 Delivery: Nene Valley Living Landscape _________________________________________________ 8 Delivery: Great Fen Living Landscape __________________________________________________ 10 Delivery: North Chilterns Chalk Living Landscape ________________________________________ 12 Delivery: Ouse Valley Living Landscape ________________________________________________ 13 Delivery: Living Landscapes we are maintaining & responsive on ____________________________ 14 Delivery: Beyond our living landscapes _________________________________________________ 16 Local Wildlife Sites _________________________________________________________________ 17 Planning __________________________________________________________________________ 17 Monitoring and Research ____________________________________________________________ 18 Local Environmental Records Centres __________________________________________________ 19 Land acquisition and disposal _______________________________________________________ 20 Land management for developers _____________________________________________________ 21 Reaching out - People Closer to Nature __________________________________________
    [Show full text]
  • Cambridgeshire Green Infrastructure Strategy
    Cambridgeshire Green Infrastructure Strategy Page 1 of 176 June 2011 Contributors The Strategy has been shaped and informed by many partners including: The Green Infrastructure Forum Anglian Water Cambridge City Council Cambridge Past, Present and Future (formerly Cambridge Preservation Society) Cambridge Sports Lake Trust Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Biodiversity Partnership Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Environmental Record Centre Cambridgeshire County Council Cambridgeshire Horizons East Cambridgeshire District Council East of England Development Agency (EEDA) English Heritage The Environment Agency Fenland District Council Forestry Commission Farming and Wildlife Advisory Group GO-East Huntingdonshire District Council Natural England NHS Cambridgeshire Peterborough Environment City Trust Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB) South Cambridgeshire District Council The National Trust The Wildlife Trust for Bedfordshire, Cambridgeshire, Northamptonshire & Peterborough The Woodland Trust Project Group To manage the review and report to the Green Infrastructure Forum. Cambridge City Council Cambridgeshire County Council Cambridgeshire Horizons East Cambridgeshire District Council Environment Agency Fenland District Council Huntingdonshire District Council Natural England South Cambridgeshire District Council The Wildlife Trust Consultants: LDA Design Page 2 of 176 Contents 1 Executive Summary ................................................................................11 2 Background
    [Show full text]
  • Trumpington Meadows - Written Representations
    TRUMPINGTON MEADOWS - WRITTEN REPRESENTATIONS 20 March 2018 10:19 South Trumpington Parish Meeting considered the proposed parking restrictions at its meeting last night. The Meeting did not support the proposal. There was significant confusion about the scheme, including the availability of spaces for residents (or residents permits) and enforcement. There was also concern about the high cost of visitors permits. The meeting felt that the proposals were over the top given that the Park and Ride parking will be free from April and therefore commuters parking in the development is unlikely to be an issue. The Parish Meeting felt that a more relaxed scheme would be more appropriate and recommend that the proposals are dropped and consultations with the local community groups take place to find an appropriate solution. __________________________________________________________________________________________________ I am resident of x Charger Road, Trumpington Meadows. I am writing to file my reservations regarding the enforcement of new parking restrictions scheme for Trumpington meadows. I want to highlight the fact that many residents in this new housing complex have only one allocated parking and they have to rely on the parking bays on the roadsides for parking the second car. It is usually the case where families often need two cars needed by both husband and wife in order to carry out daily routines like, office, school runs, etc. My reservation is that the residents should be allowed to use the additional spaces on the roadside. Or an alternative parking for the residents shall be provided in order to accommodate those having two cars. When I bought the property couple of years back, I was told by Barratt that I can use these additional parking bays to park my second car.
    [Show full text]
  • Political Group Submissions to the Cambridgeshire County Council Electoral Review
    Political group submissions to the Cambridgeshire County Council electoral review This PDF document contains submissions from Political Groups. Some versions of Adobe allow the viewer to move quickly between bookmarks. Click on the submission you would like to view. If you are not taken to that page, please scroll through the document. Submission to the Boundary Commission on the Review of the Divisions in Cambridgeshire by the Liberal Democrat Group on Cambridge City Council. 1. The Timing of this Submission. The Commission has allowed submissions from Cambridge City Council to be sent after the official closing date of 19th January up to 31st January, This submission is by the Liberal Democrat group on Cambridge City Council. It would have been impossible to have got a meaningful submission in by the 19th January as the correct numbers were not available at that date (see item 2). We contend that the scheme submitted by the Cambridge Labour Party through the City Council is fundamentally flawed as it is based on incorrect numbers and not compliant with the rules governing reviews of County Council electoral arrangements in two-tier areas (see item 3). 2. The Numbers of Electors. The numbers of electors in Cambridge has changed in two ways since summer 2014 when the Commission indicated that it was “minded to” fix the numbers of members of the County Council (and hence the Divisions) at 63. Number of students underestimated. The original numbers overlooked new student accommodation in the city which is projected to house 2,410 students. As Cambridge University records show that approximately 16% of students are not citizens of the UK, EU or a Commonwealth country, it is reasonable to assume that 84% (ie 2,025) are expected to be eligible to vote in some UK elections.
    [Show full text]
  • 25 February 2010 Mr G S Kaddish Bidwells Trumpington Road Cambridge CB2 9LD Your Ref: Dear Sir, TOWN and COUNTRY PLANNING
    25 February 2010 Mr G S Kaddish Our Ref: APP/Q0505/A/09/2103599/NWF Bidwells APP/Q0505/A/09/2103592/NWF Trumpington Road Your Ref: Cambridge CB2 9LD Dear Sir, TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING ACT 1990 – SECTION 78 APPEAL BY COUNTRYSIDE PROPERTIES PLC - AT LAND BETWEEN LONG ROAD AND SHELFORD ROAD (CLAY FARM), CAMBRIDGE - Application reference 07/0621/OUT APPEAL BY COUNTRYSIDE PROPERTIES (UK) LTD - AT GLEBE FARM, SHELFORD ROAD, CAMBRIDGE - Application 08/0363/OUT 1. I am directed by the Secretary of State to say that consideration has been given to the report of the Inspector, Ava Wood DIP ARCH MRTPI, who held a public local inquiry into your clients' appeals which sat for 10 days between 28 September and 19 October 2009: Appeal A: made by Countryside Properties PLC against non-determination by Cambridge City Council (the Council) of an application for residential development of up to 2,300 new mixed-tenure dwellings and accompanying provision of community facilities and landscaped open spaces including 49ha of public open space in the green corridor, retail (A1), food and drink uses (A3, A4, A5), financial and professional services (A2), non-residential institutions (D1), a nursery (D1), alternative health treatments (D1), provision for education facilities and all related infrastructure including: all roads and associated infrastructure, alternative locations for Cambridgeshire Guide Bus stops, alternative location for CGB Landscape Ecological Mitigation Area, attenuation ponds including alternative location for Addenbrookes’ Access Road pond, cycleways, footways and crossings of Hobson’s Brook at Land between Long Road and Shelford Road (Clay Farm), Cambridge in accordance with application number 07/0621/OUT, dated 5 June 2007.
    [Show full text]
  • 0900265S73 (Renewal of Consent/Vary Conditions)
    AGENDA ITEM NO. DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT PANEL 15 JUN 09 Case No: 0900265S73 (RENEWAL OF CONSENT/VARY CONDITIONS) Proposal: VARIATION OF CONDITION 16 OF PLANNING PERMISSION 0213092OUT TO STATE AS FOLLOWS:' THE USE HEREBY PERMITTED SHALL BE CARRIED ON ONLY BY COLLMART GROWERS LTD AND QUALITY FRUIT AND VEG LTD Location: COLLMART GROWERS LTD THE DROVE PONDERSBRIDGE Applicant: COLLMART GROWERS LTD Grid Ref: 525914 292082 Date of Registration: 10.03.2009 Parish: FARCET RECOMMENDATION - REFUSE 1. DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND APPLICATION 1.1 This application has been referred to Panel at the request of a local Member. 1.2 The proposal is to vary condition 16 of outline planning permission 0213092OUT for the erection of buildings for packing, grading, preparation and distribution of vegetables. A copy of the Panel report and decision notice for that application are attached. The condition states "The use hereby permitted shall be carried on only by Collmart Growers Ltd". This application is to vary the condition to also allow Quality Fruit and Veg Ltd (QFAVL) to use the land and buildings. 1.3 The site is in the countryside approximately 11km south-east of Peterborough and 20 km north of Huntingdon. The applicant’s existing operation includes a 1.47ha site which fronts onto The Drove with a building, yard and weighbridge used in association with grading, washing, bagging and distributing vegetables, particularly onions but also other root vegetables such as carrots, potatoes, parsnips and swede. 1.4 The outline permission is for the erection of buildings with a floor space of 10,000sqm on a site of 8.2ha to the north of the existing premises.
    [Show full text]
  • Cambridge Green Belt Review Grosvenor Estates
    Ý¿³¾®·¼¹» Ù®»»² Þ»´¬ λª·»© Ù®±•ª»²±® Û•¬¿¬»• Ì»®»²½» юα«®µ» Ô¬¼ ½®»¿¬·²¹ •«½½»••º«´ »²ª·®±²³»²¬• Trumpington Green Belt Appraisal -Final Contents TRUMPINGTON GREEN BELT APPRAISAL 3 Introduction 3 Methodology 3 SECTION ONE: BASELINE 5 Legislation and policy 5 National 5 NPPF – Green belts 5 Regional 6 Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Structure Plan, adopted October 2003 6 East of England Plan, adopted May 2008 6 East of England Plan, draft revision March 2010 7 Local 7 Cambridgeshire Local Plan, adopted July 2006 (saved policies) 7 South Cambridgeshire Local Development Framework Core Strategy, adopted January 2007 8 South Cambridgeshire Local Development Framework – Cambridge Southern Fringe Area Action Plan (AAP) adopted February 2008 8 Landscape resource 10 Topography 10 Access 10 Vegetation 11 Land use 12 Settlement and built form 12 Landscape character 13 Previous landscape assessments 13 Green belt studies and landscape character 14 Landscape character of the site and its setting 15 Landscape character of the site 17 Landscape value of the area of search 18 Site visibility 18 Zone of visual influence 18 Local zone 19 Intermediate zone 22 Distant zone 25 SECTION TWO: GREEN BELT ANALYSIS 28 Conclusions of previous green belt studies 28 Effect of future development on landscape and visual resources 30 Effect of development on character areas and viewpoints surrounding the area of search 30 Landscape character area 3C - Newton Chalk Hills representative viewpoint 12 – St Margaret’s Mount 30 Terence O’Rourke Ltd 1 of 43 July 2012 Trumpington
    [Show full text]
  • Circumambulation May 2020
    A CIRCUMAMBULATION OF CAMBRIDGE, MAY 2020 Early May 2020 was a ,me for some considera,on. The UK and much if not all of the rest of the world had become subject to the spectre of social quaran,ne. So, what to do? Some thought of doing this and some of doing that, and many might have thought of doing something else en,rely. We looked at eachother and decided we’d go for a walk. But where? A walk can be undertaken for exercise, or for rumina,on, or indeed s,mula,on. We are not that energe,c: the griLy purposefulness of runners and pounders and hikers seems very purposeful, but it seems to be all eyes forward and swea,ness and expensive clothing. We don’t do that. We want to wander and gaze about. Cambridge is an economically thrusOul city – it’s a boom town – and this, naturally, translates into it being a demographically thrusOul city. It’s burs,ng its boundaries – it’s so aLrac,ve that great tracts of land all around it are being converted from farmland to housing. It’s a very topical topic in Cambridge – is this a good or less than good thing? So, let’s go and have a look. Picture Cambridge as a gourmand. It would say that it has a discerning palate and that it chooses its dishes with prescience and precision. It is well-fed. It is one of the first in line when goodies are being proffered, and it maintains it chooses only the most piquant and the most appe,zing.
    [Show full text]